cowthulhu
Joined 3 years ago
Karma
641
Submissions
210
Member since
Nov 30
Recent submissions
Comment · 26 days ago
Oh, yeah, I interpreted the parent comment as "minimize the grade" but if it's instead "keep grade below threshold" (for reasonable thresholds) that would make more sense.
Comment · 26 days ago
I suspect that this would result in absurdly long routes. Imagine trying to go up a mountain while minimizing grade... you'd end up zig-zagging back and forth endlessly.
Comment · 27 days ago
I think it's got two components - first, people don't actually understand the tenants of mainstream EA. For instance, some people think that one of the core principles of EA is "make as much money as possible at any cost", which is incorrect.
Second, EA is a small movement with an above average amount of crazy people (IE someone who does think you should make as much money as possible at any cost), who then basically monopolize the media attention. This then feeds into the first component.
EA is in a fairly bad spot where nobody seems to be really attempting to understand it or meaningfully engage with it's ideas, instead just parroting the same few talking points (SBF anyone?)
Comment · 1 month ago
My experience is that Opus can definitely write decent code, but it incurs tech debt and adds unneeded complexity.
Comment · 1 month ago
I definitely agree that it's not perfect. I think he's a great starting point though, because when trying to get engineers to document stuff (something typically approached with similar enthusiasm to having their teeth removed with a hammer) it really helps if the "how to write a spec" doc is somewhat fun to read.
Unrelated - I really dig your "my [x]th year as a bootstraped founder" series.
Comment · 1 month ago
It can be subjective, because it's internal to you and not something that gets litigated or whatever. A close call is anything that you personally consider to be a close call.
I'm not asking you to post it here, I'm asking you to think about it and then remember it in the future, should the event ever occur.
Comment · 1 month ago
I was initially turned on to the idea of using specs by Joel Spolsky [https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/10/02/painless-functiona...]
I think they're valuable, both because they get you to think through the actual functionality (and underlying implementation) of the software, and the make sure that you and the [person you're developing for] are roughly on the same page. Plus, every edge case or design issue you catch while writing the spec saves you a ton of time.
That said, I think a big weakness of specs is that it's just not possible to write a perfect spec that doesn't have any blind spots and covers all the edge cases and issues you'll run into when actually developing. This makes it more difficult to hold the customer accountable to the spec, since you (the designer and devs) can't really be accountable to the spec unless you want to deliver some overly literal, not-actually-helpful product.
Comment · 1 month ago
:\
Comment · 1 month ago
The bar is high, but there's probably some combination of events (combined with a high confidence in my own lucidity over an extended period of time) that would convince me.
Comment · 1 month ago
Is there truly nothing an AI system could do (no matter how outlandish it seems today) that would give you pause?
Comment · 1 month ago
I think I'm coming across as confrontational, which is genuinely not my intention - sorry about that. Not trying to score points or anything, just encourage people to introspect a bit :)
I think your viewpoint is totally valid, and I'm not trying to argue against it.
Comment · 1 month ago
To avoid shifting goalposts
Comment · 1 month ago
I'm not asking for justification, just for people to introspect about what, if anything, it would take for them to consider AI a serious threat. No justification needed, and really no need to post it here, just think about it and remember it in the future.